North Dakota AG Clarifies Williston Senior Council’s Status

North Dakota Attorney General Drew Wrigley issued a formal opinion last week, finding that the Williston Council for the Aging, Inc., a nonprofit that provides senior services in the region, qualifies as a public entity under state law because it receives significant support from county mill levy funds.

The opinion, requested by Williston resident Edward Ennis, examined whether the organization violated North Dakota’s open records and open meetings laws by allegedly failing to post meeting notices, failing to personally notify interested individuals, and denying access to certain records.

According to the Attorney General’s office, the Council receives roughly 27% of its funding from mill levies collected in McKenzie, Williams, and Divide counties. Those tax dollars—used for programs such as senior meals, transportation, and building operations—constitute public funds. Because the mill levy money is provided as general support rather than payment for specific services, Wrigley concluded the Council falls under open records requirements for any documents relating to the use of those funds.

However, based on the facts provided by the Council, the Attorney General found no violations of the state’s transparency laws. The council claimed that only two meetings were held in September and November of 2022. They also denied conducting any secret meetings. The AG's opinion concluded that without evidence of additional meetings, no open meetings violation occurred.

The office also determined the Council had no legal obligation to provide personal notice to Ennis because the organization reported receiving no request from him for individual notification.

On the records issue, the Council supplied bylaws and meeting minutes but declined to provide internal governance documents, including those related to board elections and term limits. Wrigley’s office found this appropriate, noting that because the organization is subject to the open records law only to the extent public funds are involved, it must release only records tied to the expenditure or use of those funds—not broader internal documents.

Get our free mobile app

The opinion concludes that the Council is indeed a public entity for purposes of open records law but did not violate state requirements under the circumstances presented.