Let me begin by saying that the unusual "roundtable" gathering of Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos, Governor Matt Bevin, and various "stakeholders" in the future of Kentucky public education, that took place at the Bluegrass Community and Technical College's Newtown Campus on April 17 did not violate the letter of the open meetings law.
I have gathered the following information:
• The roundtable consisted of the following participants: Secretary Betsy DeVos, Gov. Matt Bevin, Wayne Lewis, Kentucky Education commissioner, Derrick Ramsey, secretary, Kentucky Education and Workforce Development Cabinet, Linda Hampton, Governor's Office of Early Childhood [?], Hal Heiner, chairman, Kentucky Board of Education, Milton Seymore, vice chairman, Kentucky Board of Education, Dr. Gary Houchens, Kentucky Board of Education, Kristina Slattery, Kentucky Cabinet for Economic Development
Business Groups: Iris Wilbur, Greater Louisville Inc., Andi Johnson, Commerce Lexington
Stakeholders: Ryan Cantrell, American Federation for Children, Andrew McNeill, Americans for Prosperity, Andrew Vandiver, Catholic Conference of Kentucky, Jim Waters, Bluegrass Institute, Charles Leis, Ed Choice Kentucky, Deana Paradis, Kentucky Association of Independent Schools, Dr. Kris Williams, chancellor, Kentucky Community and Technical College System, Aaron Thompson, Kentucky Council on Postsecondary Education, Heather Huddleston, School Choice Kentucky, Kesia Alim Hatcher, parent, Ailiyah Alim, student.
• The topic discussed at the meeting was "the benefits of expanding education freedom through the Education Freedom Scholarships proposal" and "the importance of giving every student in Kentucky the opportunity to access the education option that works best for them [sic]."
• The media was notified of the meeting by a press release, that included an RSVP, issued by the US Department of Education before the meeting.
• No notice of the meeting was posted at the meeting site.
• The meeting room contained adequate space for those in attendance.
• There was no sign in sheet.
• Reporters were admitted and advised that no business "of any group" would be/was discussed.
• Reporters were not aware that anyone was denied access at the meeting site.
The attendees were identified in a news release issued by the Bluegrass Institute. It is the only comprehensive list I located. The release omitted Kathy Gornik, KBE Supreme Court District 5 member, who a reporter said was also present.
I question whether "no business" of any group was discussed. Public business is not defined by statute but is defined in caselaw as "the discussion of the various alternatives to a given issue about which the [agency] has the option to take action." Draw your own conclusions.
But because a quorum of the members of the 12 member Kentucky Board of Education was not present â whether by accident or by design â the requirements of the Kentucky open meetings law were not triggered. There was no violation of the law.
KRS 61.810(1) states that "[a]ll meetings of a quorum of the members of any public agency at which any public business is discussed or at which any action is taken by the agency" must comply with all requirements of the open meetings law. Absent a quorum â or a series of less than quorum meetings attended by agency members collectively constituting a quorum to avoid the open meetings law -- the requirements of the law are not triggered.
Shortly after I read about the meeting, I reached out to a reporter to ask the following questions:
• Do you know who called the meeting?
• What kind of notice did you receive?
• Was notice posted in the building where it was held?
• Were local school officials refused admittance or just not permitted to have a seat at the table? Was anyone refused admittance?
• Was there a quorum of KBE members (or any other public agency) present?
• What were the meeting room conditions like (adequate space, seating, and acoustics)?
• Was there any kind of mandatory sign in?
These are the kinds of questions that we, as citizens, must ask each time a gathering of public officials takes place at which public business is discussed.
As I mentioned, reporters were not aware that anyone was denied admission to the meeting.
Not so, according to the student journalists from Paul Lawrence Dunbar High School â Olivia Doyle and Abigail Wheatley -- who attempted to cover the event.
They later described their experience in an opinion that appeared in the student newspaper, the Lamplighter, and is linked below.
Turned away by an employee when they first arrived, the students "watched as the same man waved other drivers through without stopping them, but he stopped us again. Instead of listening to our questions, he just repeated 'Sorry. It's invitation only.'
Disappointed, we called [faculty advisor] Mrs. Turner again and explained the situation. We were missing school for this event which had been reported as a 'public' event on a public college campus. Unable to ask questions, we settled for a picture from our car."
They linked to the US Department of Education announcement which described the event as "open press," and indicated that "A valid media credential and photo ID will be required for access to the events."
In fact, attendees were required to identify themselves (as credentialed media representatives) and these student journalists were refused admittance.
A violation of the open meetings law? No.
But if "giving every student in Kentucky the opportunity to access the education option that works best" is a priority for public officials, perhaps they should start by giving students access to meetings at which education options are discussed.
Like Abigail and Olivia, we should question whether those officials understand and are complying with the open meetings law, ideally both in letter and in spirit.
Note: In a conversation with the students' advisor, I learned that the original US Department of Education press release did not indicate that "A valid media credential and photo ID will be required for access to the events" and this language was added as the meeting proceeded.
In addition, I learned that the students have scheduled a meeting with the president of BCTC to discuss, among other things, why a public building was used to conduct an "invitation only" meeting.
Finally, I learned that the Washington Post has expressed interest in the story.
