Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263 (2026)

Meetings, decisions, and deliberations of public body; requirements; attending or addressing meeting of public body; COVID-19 safety measures; tape-recording, videotaping, broadcasting, and telecasting proceedings; accommodation of absent members; remote attendance; rules; exclusion from meeting; exemptions.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

OPEN MEETINGS ACT

Act 267 of 1976

15.263 Meetings, decisions, and deliberations of public body; requirements; attending or addressing meeting of public body; COVID-19 safety measures; tape-recording, videotaping, broadcasting, and telecasting proceedings; accommodation of absent members; remote attendance; rules; exclusion from meeting; exemptions.

Sec. 3.

(1) All meetings of a public body must be open to the public and must be held in a place available to the general public. All persons must be permitted to attend any meeting except as otherwise provided in this act. The right of a person to attend a meeting of a public body includes the right to tape-record, to videotape, to broadcast live on radio, and to telecast live on television the proceedings of a public body at a public meeting. The exercise of this right does not depend on the prior approval of the public body. However, a public body may establish reasonable rules and regulations in order to minimize the possibility of disrupting the meeting. For a meeting of a public body held in person before April 1, 2021, the public body shall do both of the following:

(a) To the extent feasible under the circumstances, ensure adherence to social distancing and mitigation measures recommended by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for purposes of preventing the spread of COVID-19, including the measure that an individual remain at least 6 feet from anyone from outside the individual's household.

(b) Adopt heightened standards of facility cleaning and disinfection to limit participant exposure to COVID-19, as well as protocols to clean and disinfect in the event of a positive COVID-19 case in the public body's meeting place.

(2) All decisions of a public body must be made at a meeting open to the public. For purposes of any meeting subject to this section, except a meeting of any state legislative body at which a formal vote is taken, the public body shall, subject to section 3a, establish the following procedures to accommodate the absence of any member of the public body due to military duty, a medical condition, or a statewide or local state of emergency or state of disaster declared pursuant to law or charter or local ordinance by the governor or a local official, governing body, or chief administrative officer that would risk the personal health or safety of members of the public or the public body if the meeting were held in person:

(a) Procedures by which the absent member may participate in, and vote on, business before the public body, including, but not limited to, procedures that provide for both of the following:

(i) Two-way communication.

(ii) For each member of the public body attending the meeting remotely, a public announcement at the outset of the meeting by that member, to be included in the meeting minutes, that the member is in fact attending the meeting remotely. If the member is attending the meeting remotely for a purpose other than for military duty, the member's announcement must further identify specifically the member's physical location by stating the county, city, township, or village and state from which he or she is attending the meeting remotely.

(b) Procedures by which the public is provided notice of the absence of the member and information about how to contact that member sufficiently in advance of a meeting of the public body to provide input on any business that will come before the public body.

(3) All deliberations of a public body constituting a quorum of its members must take place at a meeting open to the public except as provided in this section and sections 7 and 8.

(4) A person must not be required as a condition of attendance at a meeting of a public body to register or otherwise provide his or her name or other information or otherwise to fulfill a condition precedent to attendance.

(5) A person must be permitted to address a meeting of a public body under rules established and recorded by the public body. The legislature or a house of the legislature may provide by rule that the right to address may be limited to prescribed times at hearings and committee meetings only.

(6) A person must not be excluded from a meeting otherwise open to the public except for a breach of the peace actually committed at the meeting.

(7) This act does not apply to the following public bodies, but only when deliberating the merits of a case:

(a) The Michigan compensation appellate commission operating as described in either of the following:

(i) Section 274 of the worker's disability compensation act of 1969, 1969 PA 317, MCL 418.274.

(ii) Section 34 of the Michigan employment security act, 1936 (Ex Sess) PA 1, 421.34.

(b) The state tenure commission created in section 1 of article VII of 1937 (Ex Sess) PA 4, MCL 38.131, when acting as a board of review from the decision of a controlling board.

(c) The employment relations commission or an arbitrator or arbitration panel created or appointed under 1939 PA 176, MCL 423.1 to 423.30.

(d) The Michigan public service commission created under 1939 PA 3, MCL 460.1 to 460.11.

(8) This act does not apply to an association of insurers created under the insurance code of 1956, 1956 PA 218, MCL 500.100 to 500.8302, or other association or facility formed under that act as a nonprofit organization of insurer members.

(9) This act does not apply to a committee of a public body that adopts a nonpolicymaking resolution of tribute or memorial, if the resolution is not adopted at a meeting.

(10) This act does not apply to a meeting that is a social or chance gathering or conference not designed to avoid this act.

(11) This act does not apply to the Michigan veterans' trust fund board of trustees or a county or district committee created under 1946 (1st Ex Sess) PA 9, MCL 35.602 to 35.610, when the board of trustees or county or district committee is deliberating the merits of an emergent need. A decision of the board of trustees or county or district committee made under this subsection must be reconsidered by the board or committee at its next regular or special meeting consistent with the requirements of this act. "Emergent need" means a situation that the board of trustees, by rules promulgated under the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201 to 24.328, determines requires immediate action.

(12) As used in subsection (2):

(a) "Formal vote" means a vote on a bill, amendment, resolution, motion, proposal, recommendation, or any other measure on which a vote by members of a state legislative body is required and by which the state legislative body effectuates or formulates public policy.

(b) "Medical condition" means an illness, injury, disability, or other health-related condition.

History: 1976, Act 267, Eff. Mar. 31, 1977 ;-- Am. 1981, Act 161, Imd. Eff. Nov. 30, 1981 ;-- Am. 1986, Act 269, Imd. Eff. Dec. 19, 1986 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 158, Imd. Eff. June 14, 1988 ;-- Am. 1988, Act 278, Imd. Eff. July 27, 1988 ;-- Am. 2016, Act 504, Eff. Apr. 9, 2017 ;-- Am. 2018, Act 485, Eff. Mar. 29, 2019 ;-- Am. 2020, Act 228, Imd. Eff. Oct. 16, 2020 ;-- Am. 2020, Act 254, Imd. Eff. Dec. 22, 2020

AdminRule Notes:

R 35.621 of the Michigan Administrative Code.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 106 cases (32 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Booth Newspapers, Inc v. Univ. of Michigan Bd. of Regents, 507 N.W.2d 422 (Mich. 1993).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Booth Newspapers, Inc v. Univ. of Michigan Bd. of Regents, 507 N.W.2d 422 (Mich. 1993). · cites it 8× “[MCL 15.263; MSA 4.1800(13).] [15] MCL 15.”

Speicher v. Columbia Twp. Bd. of Trs., 860 N.W.2d 51 (Mich. 2014). · cites it 6× “270(2), which provides as follows: A decision made by a public body may be invalidated if the public body has not complied with the requirements of section 3 [MCL 15.263](1), (2), and (3) in making the decision or if failure to give notice in accordance with section 5 [MCL 15.”

Duane Lockwood v. Twp. of Ellington, 917 N.W.2d 413 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 3× “*398 Further, plaintiffs argued that a decision of a public body can only be invalidated if the public body has not complied with the requirements of MCL 15.263(1) through (3). Plaintiffs contended that was not the case here, given that the November 1, 2016 meeting was open to…”

Herald Co. v. City of Bay City, 614 N.W.2d 873 (Mich. 2000). · cites it 4× “[MCL 15.263; MSA 4.1800(13).] The statute strictly limits "closed session" meetings of public bodies and expressly states that, "except as otherwise provided.”

Esperance v. Chesterfield Twp., 280 N.W.2d 559 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 6× “I agree with the majority opinion insofar as it holds that the prerequisites to the invalidation of any decision of a public body listed in MCL 15.263(1)-(3); MSA 4.1800(13)(1)-(3) are disjunctive rather than conjunctive.”

Moore v. Fennville Pub. Schs. Bd. of Educ., 566 N.W.2d 31 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 12× “” MCL 15.263(2); MSA 4.1800(13)(2). In addition, “[a]ll deliberations of a public body constituting a quorum of its members shall take place at a meeting open to the public except as provided in this section and sections 7 and 8.”

Booth Newspapers, Inc v. Univ. of Michigan Bd. of Regents, 481 N.W.2d 778 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 6× “MCL 15.263(1); MSA 4.1800(13)(1). The OMA defines a meeting as the convening of a public body at which a quorum is present to deliberate or render a decision on public policy.”

Genesee Cnty. Drain Comm'r v. Genesee Cnty., 309 Mich. App. 317 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “These allocations, per MCL 15.263(1), took place at public meetings and were (and remain) matters of public record.”

Citizens for a Better Algonac Cmty. Schs. v. Algonac Cmty. Schs., 317 Mich. App. 171 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “] -2- The OMA generally provides that “[a]ll meetings of a public body shall be open to the public and shall be held in a place available to the general public[,]” that “[a]ll decisions of a public body shall be made at a meeting open to the public[,]” and that, except as…”

Timmon v. Wood, 633 F. Supp. 2d 453 (W.D. Mich. 2008). · cites it 4× “Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263 (5). The City of Lansing has adopted rules to govern the procedure at Council meetings.”

Lysogorski v. Bridgeport Charter Twp., 662 N.W.2d 108 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “[MCL 15.263(5) (emphasis added).] *301 Plaintiff’s argument errs in failing to consider the first sentence of this provision, which states that “[a] person shall be permitted to address a meeting of a public body under rules established and recorded by the public body.”

Youkhanna v. City of Sterling Heights, 332 F. Supp. 3d 1058 (E.D. Mich. 2018). · cites it 3× “LAWS § 15.263(1). Also, "a public body may establish reasonable rules and regulations in order to minimize the possibility of disrupting the meeting.”

Show all 106 citing cases →

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263(1) — 49 cases

Duane Lockwood v. Twp. of Ellington, 917 N.W.2d 413 (Mich. Ct. App. 2018). “*398 Further, plaintiffs argued that a decision of a public body can only be invalidated if the public body has not complied with the requirements of MCL 15.263(1) through (3). Plaintiffs contended that was not the case here, given that the November 1, 2016 meeting was open to…”

Genesee Cnty. Drain Comm'r v. Genesee Cnty., 309 Mich. App. 317 (Mich. Ct. App. 2015). “These allocations, per MCL 15.263(1), took place at public meetings and were (and remain) matters of public record.”

Citizens for a Better Algonac Cmty. Schs. v. Algonac Cmty. Schs., 317 Mich. App. 171 (Mich. Ct. App. 2016). “] -2- The OMA generally provides that “[a]ll meetings of a public body shall be open to the public and shall be held in a place available to the general public[,]” that “[a]ll decisions of a public body shall be made at a meeting open to the public[,]” and that, except as…”

People v. Whitney, 578 N.W.2d 329 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).

Esperance v. Chesterfield Twp., 280 N.W.2d 559 (Mich. Ct. App. 1979). “I agree with the majority opinion insofar as it holds that the prerequisites to the invalidation of any decision of a public body listed in MCL 15.263(1)-(3); MSA 4.1800(13)(1)-(3) are disjunctive rather than conjunctive.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263(10) — 3 cases

Booth Newspapers, Inc v. Univ. of Michigan Bd. of Regents, 507 N.W.2d 422 (Mich. 1993). “[MCL 15.263; MSA 4.1800(13).] [15] MCL 15.”

Ryant v. Cleveland Twp., 608 N.W.2d 101 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).

St Aubin v. Ishpeming City Council, 494 N.W.2d 803 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263(2) — 32 cases

Booth Newspapers, Inc v. Univ. of Michigan Bd. of Regents, 507 N.W.2d 422 (Mich. 1993). “[MCL 15.263; MSA 4.1800(13).] [15] MCL 15.”

Speicher v. Columbia Twp. Bd. of Trs., 860 N.W.2d 51 (Mich. 2014). “270(2), which provides as follows: A decision made by a public body may be invalidated if the public body has not complied with the requirements of section 3 [MCL 15.263](1), (2), and (3) in making the decision or if failure to give notice in accordance with section 5 [MCL 15.”

Glover v. Parole Bd., 596 N.W.2d 598 (Mich. 1999).

Federated Publications, Inc v. Michigan State Univ. Bd. of Trs., 594 N.W.2d 491 (Mich. 1999).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263(3) — 16 cases

Herald Co. v. City of Bay City, 614 N.W.2d 873 (Mich. 2000). “[MCL 15.263; MSA 4.1800(13).] The statute strictly limits "closed session" meetings of public bodies and expressly states that, "except as otherwise provided.”

Moore v. Fennville Pub. Schs. Bd. of Educ., 566 N.W.2d 31 (Mich. Ct. App. 1997). “” MCL 15.263(2); MSA 4.1800(13)(2). In addition, “[a]ll deliberations of a public body constituting a quorum of its members shall take place at a meeting open to the public except as provided in this section and sections 7 and 8.”

Booth Newspapers, Inc v. Univ. of Michigan Bd. of Regents, 481 N.W.2d 778 (Mich. Ct. App. 1992). “MCL 15.263(1); MSA 4.1800(13)(1). The OMA defines a meeting as the convening of a public body at which a quorum is present to deliberate or render a decision on public policy.”

Craig v. Detroit Pub. Schs. Chief Exec. Officer, 697 N.W.2d 529 (Mich. Ct. App. 2005).

Arnold Transit Co. v. City of MacKinac Island, 297 N.W.2d 904 (Mich. Ct. App. 1980).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263(5) — 11 cases

Lysogorski v. Bridgeport Charter Twp., 662 N.W.2d 108 (Mich. Ct. App. 2003). “[MCL 15.263(5) (emphasis added).] *301 Plaintiff’s argument errs in failing to consider the first sentence of this provision, which states that “[a] person shall be permitted to address a meeting of a public body under rules established and recorded by the public body.”

Michael Zoran v. Twp. of Cottrellville, 913 N.W.2d 359 (Mich. Ct. App. 2017).

Youkhanna v. City of Sterling Heights, 332 F. Supp. 3d 1058 (E.D. Mich. 2018). “LAWS § 15.263(1). Also, "a public body may establish reasonable rules and regulations in order to minimize the possibility of disrupting the meeting.”

Ritchie v. Coldwater Cmty. Schs., 947 F. Supp. 2d 791 (W.D. Mich. 2013).

Michigan Open Carry Inc v. House of Representatives (Mich. Ct. App. 2025).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263(6) — 4 cases

Frank Cusumano v. Janet I Dunn (Mich. Ct. App. 2020).

Robert L Hindelang v. City of Grosse Pointe (Mich. Ct. App. 2023).

John Holeton v. City of Livonia (Mich. Ct. App. 2019).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263(7) — 5 cases

In Re Midland Publ'g Co., 362 N.W.2d 580 (Mich. 1985).

In Re Parole of Glover, 575 N.W.2d 772 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).

Nicholas v. Meridian Charter Twp. Bd., 609 N.W.2d 574 (Mich. Ct. App. 2000).

Herald Co. v. City of Bay City, 577 N.W.2d 696 (Mich. Ct. App. 1998).

Elizabeth Markel v. David MacKley (Mich. Ct. App. 2016).

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 15.263(8)(e) — 1 case

Wexford Cnty. Prosecutor v. Pranger, 268 N.W.2d 344 (Mich. Ct. App. 1978).

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.