A follow up to last night’s news about the House of Representatives’ failure to call SB 63 for a vote in the waning hours of the legislative session (before the veto period commences).

SB 63 again appears in the House Orders of the Day for April 13, the first day of the two day veto override period. It may or may not be called, it may or may not pass (my money is on the former), and it may or may not be vetoed by the Governor if it passes (my money is definitely on the former).

But at that point, the Governor’s veto cannot be overridden. Senator Carroll will be obliged to begin his efforts anew in 2023. Regardless of Carroll’s good intentions, he cannot achieve his stated goal of enhancing protection for the judiciary, law enforcement, and prosecutors. The information he seeks to wall off in public records is widely accessible elsewhere on the internet. Walling off information that is almost entirely inaccessible under the open records law will not resolve a far more serious societal malaise.

We lament the Senate’s failure to vote on HB 222, Representative Nima Kulkarni’s anti-SLAPP bill intended to secure the swift dismissal of frivolous lawsuits purposed to chill the exercise of constitutional rights. 

https://www.wkyufm.org/2022-03-18/bill-to-dismiss-baseless-lawsuits-pas…

Given the recent focus on a New Jersey township’s lawsuit against an 82 year old open records requester — in which the township alleges harassment based on the volume of records requests she has filed over a period of several years — this is especially disappointing. New Jersey, like Kentucky, has no anti-SLAPP law.

On the brighter side, Kulkarni’s bill — which enjoys broad bipartisan support — appears in the Senate Orders of the Day for April 13 and is likely to be voted on after the veto period has expired. It is simply inconceivable that the Governor would consider vetoing such a salutary bill, if passed.

Finally, we note that HB 121 — sponsored by Rep. Regina Huff and requiring at least 15 minutes for public comment at every school board meeting — passed and was delivered to the Governor for signature on March 30.

The Kentucky Open Government Coalition has not taken a position on this bill. The open meetings law does not now require, and has never required, a public comment period. The Kentucky Attorney General has long urged public comment at all public meetings in his open meetings decisions and the practice is widely employed. 

Huff’s bill is narrowly limited to school board meetings. Certainly, superintendents and school districts across the state have expressed concern about this usurpation of local authority that will necessitate changes in existing public comment policies. 

https://www.somerset-kentucky.com/news/local-school-leaders-react-to-ho…

Because there are far more serious problems local school boards face in the wake of the 2022 General Assembly, the problems created by HB 121 may be the least of their concerns.